When Saudi Arabia goes these gas prices will look 'cheap'.
Posted on 03/07/2011 6:41:10 PM PST by blam
None. However, the nations that suffered hyperinflation accumulated debt they were responsible for repaying that was denominated in a currency which was not their own.
As an example, the Treaty of Versailles forced the Germans to pay war reparations denominated in the various currencies of the Allies. This is what led to hyperinflation in the Weimar Republic.
This statement is true and von Mises is correct.
von Mises was incorrect. Yes, our money supply (not just currency) is based on debt. However, the "thin air" part is a falsehood.
Debt is a promise of future labor. Money is a claim on the promise of future labor - a.k.a. a claim on debt.
Therefore, money is not "thin air" at all. It is all based on future labor.
Theories that ordinary people can’t understand are one thing.
All I know is that there isn’t any gold or silver backing our currency, more is being invented out of thin air, and everything I ever could buy or use is getting more and more and more and more expensive. Stuff like clothes, food, electricity, gas, propane, parts, building materials, etc and shipping the stuff.
And counting on the future to be a continuation of the past is another way of saying “thin air”.
I remember how ex-Texan was hounded and vilified and tormented beyond reason by people who swore up and down the housing market was not going to crash, as he accurately predicted it would, quite a few years before it did.
I agree with what you say, with one exception...I don’t think salaries will rise nearly as much as prices. Salaries are already too high, based on what this country produces, and given our debt, probably will not rise much, for a long time (aka, Argentina and Russia).
Eventually, if we can toss out the Baby Boomers and get rid of our self-imposed economic straight-jacket, we may pull out of this mess...and then, maybe, housing will rise in price. But even then, we have so many empty and oversized houses, that day may be many decades out.
They are all crooks, con artists and greedy bastards. Now these same wealthy bankster (Illuminati) own our government 100% and nobody can do anything about it. Welcome to the New World Order . . .
THX THX.
When Saudi Arabia goes these gas prices will look 'cheap'.
Agreed! Wages are now subject to global market pressures. Currency, however, is localized. Poor workers with crappy currency. Sounds like Zimbabwe!
Not even close! Money, if anything, is a store of your PAST labor. You give an hour of labor, you get a chicken. Or... a coin to buy the chicken later when you choose to do so. You have stored the past labor effort in the form of a inedible coin that can be traded in for a fresh chicken when you want to eat the chicken. New Federal Reserve currency, however, comes from thin air. No coin. No chicken, no past or future labor. Just new, from thin air, money...
Need Canadian residence, I jusst checked with TD bank which is a Canadian company
“Agreed! Wages are now subject to global market pressures. Currency, however, is localized. Poor workers with crappy currency. Sounds like Zimbabwe! “
Still not quite Zimbabwe, but only because we can print our way out of debt. But the next time, when we’re using the Chinese Yawn as the basis for our debts, we won’t have that option.
You only get that chance once.
I hope you are correct, or it’s back to doing ‘outcalls’ at lesbian bars for me ;^)
Respectfully, you're wrong.
Let's take 'currency' as an example. How does 'currency' come into existence?
Answer: The Fed purchases US Treasury securities (primarily - with MBS thrown in as of late) from Primary Dealers (big banks) and pays for them with newly circulated Federal Reserve Notes (US dollars). Fair enough?
What do those Treasury securities represent?
Answer: They are promises that our US Federal government makes against the future labor of its citizens. They are debt. Whoever has the claim on that debt has money. 'Money' is a claim on debt.
'Currency' is backed by claims on debt - or 'money'. However, 'currency' is not 'money'. Instead, it is a promise of 'money'.
If you work for an hour and get paid in currency then you are gaining claims on future labor that your employer used to possess. If you buy groceries for $100 then you are transferring your claim to $100 worth of future labor to the store owner in exchange for your groceries.
If all debt went away then all money would go away. Take a look at the Fed's H.4.1 weekly balance sheet report if you don't believe me. Study the assets and liabilities - and where they come from.
You're referring to the way things used to be prior to the 1690's - before the Bank of England obtained its charter.
We need to change our financial system to where our 'currency' is based on our completed labor instead of our future labor. That is the REAL problem - not whether we use fiat, gold, or silver for our 'currency'.
Most people have the incorrect perception that a depression in better than hyperinflation. Actually, it's worse. It makes existing debt extremely hard to pay off and destroys the middle class of a society. Everything gets divided into rich and poor.
“Debt is a promise of future labor. Money is a claim on the promise of future labor - a.k.a. a claim on debt.
Therefore, money is not “thin air” at all. It is all based on future labor.”
The money we use is debt backed. The dollar bill itself is a zero interest bond, basically. Therefore, the money we use is a form of slavery.
Future labor, most likely our children’s, their labor will be demanded of them.
Nice. /s
Exactly. Most 'currency' that we use (except for that derived from MBS) is a promise made by the US government against our future labor (and our progeny).
Future labor, most likely our children’s, their labor will be demanded of them.
True. The deficit spending both political parties are involved in is masking a current depression - but at the expense of pushing all of that future required labor onto our children, grand-children, etc. The politicians (all of them) are gutless and spineless.
Nice. /s
Is that a 'sarcasm' tag? If so, I'm not sure why - since I agree with what you stated.
Yes, it is a sarcasm tag.
I have a young daughter. Why should I be happy about her future slavery?
Capitalism, real capitalism, is NOT debt slavery. IMHO
I have a young daughter. Why should I be happy about her future slavery?
You shouldn't be.
Capitalism, real capitalism, is NOT debt slavery. IMHO
That's very true. We haven't had true economic capitalism for a long, long time. In fact, we can't have it unless our economic system is changed from being based on future labor to one that is based on completed labor.
It is only when money is based on completed labor that one can have true capital - otherwise, one just has claims on the future labor of others.
I'm still confused about the sarcasm tag. Is it directed at the truth of my comments? Or at something else?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.